• Welcome to the Green and Gold Rugby forums. As you can see we've upgraded the forums to new software. Your old logon details should work, just click the 'Login' button in the top right.

Jake White Quits Brumbies

Status
Not open for further replies.

Lorenzo

Colin Windon (37)
Because I think playing for position and defending well is the way to win tournaments. I think this focus on the popular method (must keep ball in hand at all costs!!) is to our detriment.
 
T

Train Without a Station

Guest
I think you are completely wrong. You may be right that it is the way to win tournaments, but we are not going to win anything by poorly executing a game plan which our players are not good at.

The Wallabies kicking execution has been one of their worst aspects of 2014. If White was coach and had us playing this style more so we would likely be performing even worse. It would also require picking players like Jesse Mogg, who aren't up to test rugby, to be able to execute it.
 

Lorenzo

Colin Windon (37)
I think you are completely wrong. You may be right that it is the way to win tournaments, but we are not going to win anything by poorly executing a game plan which our players are not good at.

The Wallabies kicking execution has been one of their worst aspects of 2014. If White was coach and had us playing this style more so we would likely be performing even worse. It would also require picking players like Jesse Mogg, who aren't up to test rugby, to be able to execute it.


I see this a lot. What I never see is the same people observe that our passing and ball handling can be just as bad.

I can just as easily argue that the wallabies should play without the ball because they constantly knock the fucking thing on, or lose it in contact, or throw wild passes.

Our players need to kick the ball better. Our players need to hang on to the ball better. That we aren't doing those things well isn't a reason to abandon the pursuit of either.

We have to assume that basic skills will be fixed, since if they aren't we are hosed regardless.

If they are, we're better off playing the pointy end of the tournament in the oppo half.

I'm in the minority though, I think most here would literally rather lose playing Super Rugby style rugby than win playing a positional game. To that end we should probably do what the majority wants.
 
T

Train Without a Station

Guest
It's not we would rather lose in style, it's that as we cannot win the territory battle based on the way our players have played (yet we can still score tries despite handling errors).

We have more tackle breaking running options (Hooper, Kurindrani, Folau, Tomane, etc.) than we have tactical kicking options (To'omua and White).

Remember we tried field position and only crash balls at 12 with Deans. How did that work out for us?
 

Lorenzo

Colin Windon (37)
It's not we would rather lose in style, it's that as we cannot win the territory battle based on the way our players have played (yet we can still score tries despite handling errors).

We have more tackle breaking running options (Hooper, Kurindrani, Folau, Tomane, etc.) than we have tactical kicking options (To'omua and White).

Remember we tried field position and only crash balls at 12 with Deans. How did that work out for us?


Mccabe at 12 was as successful as To'omua at 12 has been so far, based on the results.

Against SA and NZ, Mccabe at 12 was a 50% winning proposition. I don't need to go into To'omua...
 

Scrubber2050

Mark Ella (57)
One would THINK Israel would be able to accurately kick the shit off a ball, particularly after his "holiday" playing AFL. The reality is that he is poor at execution
 
T

Train Without a Station

Guest
Mccabe at 12 was as successful as To'omua at 12 has been so far, based on the results.

Against SA and NZ, Mccabe at 12 was a 50% winning proposition. I don't need to go into To'omua.

So the dominant kicking player in the team has yielded lesser results?
 

Lorenzo

Colin Windon (37)
Pretty ordinary goalpost shifting there mate.

You are all for To'omua, and you're all for the ball-in-hand strategy, yet when the evidence suggests Deans' approach with Mccabe was if anything more successful, suddenly To'omua is Joel Stransky.

If you think To'omua is in the side as a kicking option, you should be in favour of his boning. Surely the others can miss touch and grubber straight to the oppo fullback?
 
T

Train Without a Station

Guest
Pretty ordinary goalpost shifting there mate.

You are all for To'omua, and you're all for the ball-in-hand strategy, yet when the evidence suggests Deans' approach with Mccabe was if anything more successful, suddenly To'omua is Joel Stransky.

If you think To'omua is in the side as a kicking option, you should be in favour of his boning. Surely the others can miss touch and grubber straight to the oppo fullback?


It was a sarcastic response. You cannot compare results against one team based on years apart as both teams are completely different.

To'omua is one of our best field position kickers. He has struggled to execute this at test level. The only other strong options we have is Jesse Mogg.

Based on that I'd say a field position oriented approach does not suit the talent which we have available.

When we also consider that in 3 of the 4 games against the top 2 teams our line out has struggled, kicking for field position is an even less appealing option, as the prospect of winning the ball back is diminished.

But most importantly we really just lack a regular 80+% goal kicker. That's extremely important to play a field position orientated game. But also let's not forget what worked for SA in 2007 will not work in 2014. Referees are much more favorable to the attacking team. Kicking and drawing penalties is harder than it once was.

In another time when we had players like Chris Latham, Matthew Burke and Elton Flatley all available with a much more dominant line out it would be a good game plan to suit that team.

Ultimately the best game plan, is the one that your team can execute the best, and play their best.
 
T

Train Without a Station

Guest
Because it was widely ineffective. It yielded losses to Samoa, Scotland and Ireland.

To refer to results against previous All Blacks sides is flawed logic. Why? Because you cannot say they were equal opposition to the current team. The All Blacks world ranking in September each year has been as follows:

2014: 93.75
2013: 92.07
2012: 92.43
2011: 90.62

They appear to have been on an upward trajectory in the context of their results. As the points system works on winning teams taking them off their losing opposition, in the context of the other teams in World Rugby, the All Blacks are improving.

The quality of a 2014 may have defeated a 2011 side. For reference our rankings points have been:

2014: 87.07
2013: 83.34
2012: 86.62
2011: 84.84

We are ranked the highest that we ever have been at the end of September in the past 4 seasons. Just so have the All Blacks.
 
T

Train Without a Station

Guest
Doesn't it pretty much happen to every coach eventually? Die a hero or live long enough to become the villain?
 

Inside Shoulder

Nathan Sharpe (72)
Because I think playing for position and defending well is the way to win tournaments. I think this focus on the popular method (must keep ball in hand at all costs!!) is to our detriment.

Worked well on Saturday.
I assume they were kicking for position - they weren't kicking for touch
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top